TRIMURTI CONSTRUCTION CO., V. ITO WD 3(4),

MA 456/MUM/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1670 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 14-03-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 18-12-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH E , MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI P.M. JAGTAP , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANJAY GARG , JUDICIAL MEMBER M.A. NO. 456/MUM/2013 ( ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 285/M/2011) ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007 - 08 M/S. TRIMURTI CONSTRUCTION C O., GR FLOOR, VAISHNAVI DHAM COMPLEX, BEHIND RAJLAXMI PARK, KALWA, THANE - 400605 PAN: AACFT 3964C VS. ITO, WARD 3(4), VARDAAN BUILDING, WAGLE INDL. ESTATE, THANE (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE B Y : SHRI ABHISHEK TILAK, REVENUE BY : SHRI SANJEEV JAIN, D.R. DATE OF HEARING : 14.03 .201 4 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 14.03.2014 O R D E R PER SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THE PRESENT MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FO R THE RESTORATION OF APPEAL BEARING ITA NO. 285/M/2011 WHICH WAS DISMISSED VIDE ORDER DATED 01.04.2013 FOR NON ATTENDANCE/WANT OF PROSECUTION BY THE ASSESSEE. IT HAS BEEN PLEATED IN THE APPLICATION THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD DISCONTINUED ITS BUSINESS AND HAD SU RRENDERED ITS OFFICE BLOCK TO THE CONCERNED SOCIETY. AN ARRANGEMENT WAS MADE WITH THE SOCIETY TO DELIVER THE POSTAGE/MAILS TO THE ASSESSEE WHATEVER IS RECEIVED AT THE ADDRESS OF THE OLD OFFICE PREMISES. HOWEVER, THE SOCIETY , IN THIS CASE , DID NOT ACCEPT T HE NOTICE OF HEARING SENT THROUGH REGISTERED POST AND THE SAME WAS RETURNED BACK BY THE POSTAL AUTHORITIES. SINCE THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT AWARE OF THE DATE OF HEARING, ITA NO. M.A. NO.456/MUM/2013 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.285/M/2011) M/S. TRIMURTI CONSTRUCTION CO. 2 HENCE COULD NOT PRESENT ITSELF ON THE SAID DATE AND THE CASE WAS DISMISSED BY THE TRIBUNAL FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. 2. THE LD. A.R. HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ABSENCE OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE DATE OF HEARING WAS NOT INTENTIONAL RATHER DUE TO THE ABOVE SAID CIRCUMSTANCES. IT HAS BEEN FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT EVEN THE ASSESSEE DID NOT RECEIVE THE COP Y OF THE ORDER WHICH WAS ALSO SENT AT THE OLD ADDRESS. THE ASSESSEE CAME TO KNOW OF THE DISMISSAL OF THE PRESENT APPEAL WHEN ITS PARTNER CONTACTED THE CONCERNED CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT WHO AFTER BROWSING THE INTER NET SITE INFORMED THE ASSESSEE THAT THE APPEA L OF THE ASSESSEE WAS DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE HAVE BEEN SUPPORTED WITH AFFIDAVIT OF ONE MR. RAVINDRA D. PAT I L, PARTNER OF THE ASSESSEE FIRM. 3. AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. REPRESENTATIVES OF TH E PARTIES , IT APPEARS THAT THE ABSENCE OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE DATE OF HEARING WAS NOT INTENTION AL . IN VIEW OF THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE IN ITS APPLICATION, THE PRESENT MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION IS HEREBY ALLOWED AND THE APPEAL IN QUESTION IS OR DERED TO BE RESTORED TO ITS ORIGINAL POSITION/NUMBER AND THE SAME IS ORDERED TO B E FIXED FOR HEARING ON 23.06.14 S UBJECT TO THE CONDITION THAT THE ASSESSEE WILL FILE BEFORE THE SAID DATE OF HEARING ITS CORRECT ADDRESS WHERE THE NOTICE ETC. IN FUTURE CAN BE DELIVERED. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 14.03. 201 4 . SD/ - SD/ - (P.M. JAGTAP ) (SANJAY GARG) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED: 14.03. 201 4 . * KISHORE ITA NO. M.A. NO.456/MUM/2013 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.285/M/2011) M/S. TRIMURTI CONSTRUCTION CO. 3 COPY TO: THE APPELLANT THE RESPONDENT THE CIT, CONCERNED, MUMBAI THE CIT ( A) CONCERNED, MUMBAI THE DR C BENCH //TRUE COPY// [ BY ORDER DY/ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI.